Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 23:32:04 -0500
From: Interfaith Working Group
Subject: IWG Christian Science Monitor marriage language letter
December 21, 1999
Readers Write
Christian Science Monitor
1 Norway Street
Boston, MA 02115
Dear Editors:
We had three problems with an otherwise fine December
17 article about the upcoming California ballot
initiative to officially limit marriage to
mixed-gender couples. First, while "gay marriage" is
conveniently terse, it is inaccurate. We prefer to
say "civil marriage for same-gender couples." The
phrase "gay marriage" implies that there could be two
kinds of marriage: "gay" and "straight." Legally,
there would be one institution, "civil marriage."
Personally and religiously, the structure of each
marriage would continue to take on whatever form each
couple wants. Secondly: while opposition to the
legal recognition of the marriages of same-gender
couples "springs from a range of moral and religious
views," the same is true of those who support
recognition of such marriages. And third, the phrase
"irreplaceable" to describe marriage as an
institution implies that it would in fact be
replaced, rather than improved, through the removal
of gender discrimination.
Sincerely,
Barbara Purdom Christopher Purdom
Interfaith Working Group Coordinators
The above letter was sent on IWG letterhead listing 17 congregations and
religious organizations and 62 clergy from 16 religious traditions. Visit
our Religious Support for Equal Marriage Rights page:
http://www.iwgonline.org/marriage/
--
Interfaith Working Group
PO Box 11706
Philadelphia, PA 19101
http://www.iwgonline.org/
iwg@iwgonline.org
voice: 215-235-3050
fax: 215-232-0829